Nemiralisib in Patients with an Acute Exacerbation of COPD: Placebo-Controlled, Dose-Ranging Study.

Background: Management of acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is sometimes inadequate leading to either prolonged duration and/or an increased risk of recurrent exacerbations in the period following the initial event. Objective: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of inhaled nemiralisib, a phosphoinositide 3-kinase δ inhibitor, in patients experiencing an acute exacerbation of COPD. Patients and Methods: In this double-blind, placebo-controlled study, COPD patients (40-80 years, ≥10 pack-year smoking history, current moderate/severe acute exacerbation of COPD requiring standard-of-care treatment) were randomized to placebo or nemiralisib 12.5 µg, 50 µg, 100 µg, 250 µg, 500 µg, or 750 µg (ratio of 3:1:1:1:1:1:3; N=938) for 12 weeks with an exploratory 12-week follow-up period. The primary endpoint was change from baseline in post-bronchodilator FEV1 at week 12. Key secondary endpoints were rate of re-exacerbations, patient-reported outcomes (Exacerbations of Chronic Pulmonary Disease Tool, COPD Assessment Test, St George's Respiratory Questionnaire-COPD), plasma pharmacokinetics (PK) and safety/tolerability. Results: There was no difference in change from baseline FEV1 at week 12 between the nemiralisib and placebo treatment groups (posterior adjusted median difference, nemiralisib 750 µg and placebo: -0.004L (95% CrI: -0.051L to 0.042L)). Overall, there were also no differences between nemiralisib and placebo in secondary endpoints, including re-exacerbations. Plasma PK increased in a dose proportional manner. The most common adverse event for nemiralisib was post-inhalation cough which appeared to be dose-related. Conclusion: The addition of nemiralisib to standard-of-care treatment for 12 weeks did not improve lung function or re-exacerbations in patients with, and following an acute exacerbation of COPD. However, this study demonstrated that large clinical trials recruiting acutely exacerbating patients can successfully be conducted.

Assessment of the efficacy and safety of fluticasone propionate and salmeterol delivered as a combination dry powder via a capsule-based inhaler versus a multi-dose inhaler in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

BACKGROUND: This study tested the clinical non-inferiority of the fluticasone propionate/salmeterol combination 50/250 µg (FSC) Rotacaps®/Rotahaler® system, a single unit dose inhaler, with the multi-dose FSC Diskus® inhaler in adults with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). METHODS: This multi-centre, randomised, double-blind, double-dummy, two-way cross-over study compared 12 weeks' treatment of FSC administered twice daily using Rotacaps/Rotahaler or Diskus. The primary endpoint was change from baseline in trough morning forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) at Day 85, and the pre-defined non-inferiority criteria was: the lower limit of the confidence interval (CI) for the treatment difference (Rotacaps/Rotahaler-Diskus) in least squares (LS) mean change from baseline, being greater than -45 mL. Secondary endpoints included change in breathlessness (as measured by transition dyspnoea index (TDI)) and COPD-specific health status measures. RESULTS: The LS mean increase from baseline in trough FEV1 at Day 85 was 116 mL in the Rotacaps/Rotahaler group and 91 mL in the Diskus group (difference in model-adjusted LS mean change: 25 mL (95% CI 2 mL, 47 mL)), the lower limit of the CI for the treatment difference being greater than the protocol-defined criterion for non-inferiority i.e. -45 mL. Data for breathlessness, COPD-specific health status and safety parameters were similar following FSC treatment via either inhaler. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated the clinical non-inferiority of FSC 50/250 µg when administered using Rotacaps/Rotahaler compared with Diskus in patients with COPD. The risk:benefit profile for the two inhalers was comparable.

Assessment of the efficacy and safety of fluticasone propionate and salmeterol delivered as a combination dry powder via a capsule-based inhaler and a multi-dose inhaler in patients with asthma.

BACKGROUND: In developing countries, there is a need for access to affordable inhaled respiratory medicines. This study tested the clinical non-inferiority of fluticasone propionate/salmeterol combination (FSC) 50/250 µg Rotacaps®/Rotahaler® compared with FSC 50/250 µg Diskus®. METHODS: A multi-centre, randomised, double-blind, double-dummy study evaluated 12 weeks, twice daily treatment of FSC 50/250 µg administered using Rotacaps/Rotahaler or Diskus inhaler in a crossover design in patients with asthma (pre-bronchodilator forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) 40%-85% of predicted, FEV1 reversibility ≥12%, prior stable dose with inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) or ICS/long acting beta-agonist). The primary efficacy endpoint, change from baseline in trough morning FEV1 at Day 85, was analysed using a model for repeated measures analysis. The pre-defined criterion for non-inferiority was the lower limit of the CI (0.025, one-sided significance level) for the treatment difference (Rotacaps/Rotahaler-Diskus) in least squares (LS) mean change from baseline, being greater than -125 mL. Secondary endpoints included serial FEV1 measurements, morning peak expiratory flow (PEF), rescue medication use, day- and night-time asthma symptoms, Asthma Control Test (ACT) scores, and serial cortisol measured over 12 h (area under the curve (AUC0-12)). RESULTS: Treatment with FSC 50/250 µg via Rotacaps/Rotahaler or Diskus resulted in a similar LS mean increase from baseline in trough FEV1 at Day 85 (231 mL and 203 mL respectively). The difference in the model-adjusted LS mean change was 28 mL (95% CI -24 mL, 80 mL), fulfilling the criterion for non-inferiority. Data for all secondary endpoints were similar for the two treatments, supporting the primary endpoint findings. Both treatments were well tolerated and demonstrated similar safety profiles. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrated the clinical non-inferiority of FSC 50/250 µg when administered using Rotacaps/Rotahaler compared with administration using Diskus in patients with asthma, and suggests there is no difference in the risk:benefit profile between the two FSC inhalers.